Environmental Demands and the Emergence of Social Structure

Adam   Tatarynowicz; Maxim   Sytch; Ranjay  Gulati

Article | Administrative Science Quarterly | March 2016

Environmental Demands and the Emergence of Social Structure: Technological Dynamism and Interorganizational Network Forms

by Adam Tatarynowicz, Maxim Sytch and Ranjay Gulati

Abstract

This study investigates the origins of variation in the structures of interorganizational networks across industries. We combine empirical analyses of existing interorganizational networks in six industries with an agent-based simulation model of network emergence. Using data on technology partnerships from 1983 to 1999 among firms in the automotive, biotechnology and pharmaceuticals, chemicals, microelectronics, new materials, and telecommunications industries, we find that differences in technological dynamism across industries and the concomitant demands for value creation engender variations in firms’ collaborative behaviors. On average, firms in technologically dynamic industries pursue more-open ego networks, which fosters access to new and diverse resources that help sustain continuous innovation. In contrast, firms in technologically stable industries on average pursue more-closed ego networks, which fosters reliable collaboration and helps preserve existing resources. We show that because of the observed cross-industry differences in firms’ collaborative behaviors, the emergent industry-wide networks take on distinct structural forms. Technologically stable industries feature clan networks, characterized by low network connectedness and rather strong community structures. Technologically dynamic industries feature community networks, characterized by high network connectedness and medium-to-strong community structures. Convention networks, which feature high network connectedness and weak community structures, were not evident among the empirical networks we examined. Taken together, our findings advance an environmental contingency theory of network formation, which proposes a close association between the characteristics of actors’ environment and the processes of network formation among actors.

Keywords: interorganizatonal relationships; social networks; network emergence; interorganizational networks; Technology; Networks; Organizational Structure; Social and Collaborative Networks;

Format: Print

Find at Harvard

Citation:

Tatarynowicz, Adam, Maxim Sytch, and Ranjay Gulati. "Environmental Demands and the Emergence of Social Structure: Technological Dynamism and Interorganizational Network Forms." Administrative Science Quarterly 61, no. 1 (March 2016): 52–86.

This case documents the ongoing efforts by Alaska Airlines to enhance its efforts to become more customer centric by empowering its employees using a service framework. It explores how the airline starts with a completely hands-off approach to empowerment in which employees are encouraged to do whatever it takes to please customers. An economic downturn leads them to swing the pendulum the other way and develop a rules-based framework with strict guidelines. Ultimately, they settle on an intermediate model in which employees are given “freedom within a framework.” This forces them to try and shift from a rules-based to a principles-based culture. The case explores not only what they did but also how the framework was rolled out. All this seems to be working until they acquire Virgin America in 2016. Virgin too espouses customer centricity and front-line autonomy but does so in a different way. The dilemma now is blend the two cultures that are both trying to achieve similar goals but do so quite differently.

Article | Academy of Management Annals | July 2020

The Role of Interdependence in the Microfoundations of Organization Design: Task, Goal, and Knowledge Interdependence

Marlo Raveendran (formerly Goetting), Luciana Silvestri and Ranjay Gulati

Interdependence is a core concept in organization design, yet one that has remained consistently understudied. Current notions of interdependence remain rooted in seminal works, produced at a time when managers’ near-perfect understanding of the task at hand drove the organization design process. In this context, task interdependence was rightly assumed to be exogenously determined by characteristics of the work and the technology. We no longer live in that world, yet our view of interdependence has remained exceedingly task-centric and our treatment of interdependence overly deterministic. As organizations face increasingly unpredictable workstreams and workers co-design the organization alongside managers, our field requires a more comprehensive toolbox that incorporates aspects of agent-based interdependence. In this paper, we synthesize research in organization design, organizational behavior, and other related literatures to examine three types of interdependence that characterize organizations’ workflows: task, goal, and knowledge interdependence. We offer clear definitions for each construct, analyze how each arises endogenously in the design process, explore their interrelations, and pose questions to guide future research.

Keywords: interdependence; organizational behavior; work design; Organizational Design; Goals and Objectives; Knowledge Sharing;

Citation:

Raveendran (formerly Goetting), Marlo, Luciana Silvestri, and Ranjay Gulati. "The Role of Interdependence in the Microfoundations of Organization Design: Task, Goal, and Knowledge Interdependence." Academy of Management Annals 14, no. 2 (July 2020): 828–868. View Details

Cite View Details Find at Harvard

Faculty & Research

Environmental Demands and the Emergence of Social Structure: Technological Dynamism and Interorganizational Network Forms

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author